Viewing Thread:
"I'm not a sexist, but..."

Men and Women are different! C'mon, men are (Naturally stronger than women, but women have abilities better than men (no not ironing or any other crappy joke of the same theme))

A few years back Women were'nt allowed in the fireservice, now some of them had a sh!tfit and eventually the goverment said yes, now women can be firefighters, only problem, mens natural ability to be taller therefor stronger, made them better than MOST women, therefor, women failed the tests and couldnt become firefighters. Fair enough, we have these tests to make sure people are capable of saving and protecting lives...the goverment make the test ALOT easier for women, giving them a pass rate, therefor, more women are now firefighters, therefor my life is to be saved when a 5ft 5" woman carrys me out of a window ever her shoulder...?

Well then, that seems a little unfair, but get this, the women were demanding EQUAL rights! EQUAL. So, what do they do? They go out and make 'Diamond', the only car insurance JUST for women. That doesnt seem fantastically equal to me. But, men, we keep schtoomp, because we cant be bothered to argue. Woman howerever, if this was an advert saying 'Male onyl car insurance' or in other words 'Because its women who cause crashes and raise the rates', would get it banned. Now I dont mind the service, all I'm saying is Ladies, for god's sakes make up your mind, which is it you want, equal rights or privilages for different sexes?

Your veiws?

Simon Says wrote:
>
> I think you'd probably find that if a guy wanted to join that
> comittee the university would have no choice but to let him, or form
> a Mens comittee too, for all the same reasons that we have to let
> gals play AF if they want to.

Well the sabatical place as head of the Womens Comittee was a Women only place. Which I always thought was wrong. Either allow Men to apply, or have a Mens Sabatical too

well, in that case I think the insurance company would probably go bust, because it cuts out half the market and would probably have higher premiums than say, those who use the no claims bonus.

But generally I think the only people who would complain a lot are stupid women ( those ones who are very opinionated, but didn't do better than us guys at GCSE : ) )

I guess a lot of it depends on the circumstances involved.

anyways

Unbeliever wrote:
> I don't think stuff like car insurance applies. In the same way that
> Saga car insurance will only insure drivers over 50, if you see what
> I mean. It's an insurance specifically catered towards a certain
> demographic chunk of society, based on statistical conclusions.

Yes, but if we had a Mens only car insurance system, some Women would percieve it as saying 'Women cause accidents, men are better drivers, get cheap rates by not dealing with them' and eventually have it banned, atleast thats what i think.

Mr Pínk wrote:
> Unbeliever wrote:
> In December new laws will be passed giving homosexual/lesbians the
> same legal footing that heterosexuals receive in the workplace. Just
> thought I'd mention it even though it has no real bearing on the
> thrust of the debate.
>
> Whether a woman is a lesbien or not should not affect her rights
> (same goes for men), However, aif they are not qualified for the job
> the standards should not be lowered!

These laws were long overdue.

I don't think stuff like car insurance applies. In the same way that Saga car insurance will only insure drivers over 50, if you see what I mean. It's an insurance specifically catered towards a certain demographic chunk of society, based on statistical conclusions.

However, if you had a "non-gay" insurance that specifically insured heterosexuals at lower rates than gay person, there would (quite rightly) be a furore over it.

Unbeliever wrote:
> In December new laws will be passed giving homosexual/lesbians the
> same legal footing that heterosexuals receive in the workplace. Just
> thought I'd mention it even though it has no real bearing on the
> thrust of the debate.

Whether a woman is a lesbien or not should not affect her rights (same goes for men), However, aif they are not qualified for the job the standards should not be lowered!

No, I've been in and out and reading the odd bit, but not really enough to really keep track of what is going on.

suprised anyone remembers me actually : )

Thats fair enough Simon. But do you think if we had 'rock' men only car insurance, we'd get away with it? I personally wouldnt care, but i think alot of women (the ones who cared about otherthings) would.

Rosalind wrote:

> We had a Womens comittee at university. Imagine the outcry if there
> had been a Mens comittee.

I think you'd probably find that if a guy wanted to join that comittee the university would have no choice but to let him, or form a Mens comittee too, for all the same reasons that we have to let gals play AF if they want to.

Hmm...I haven't seen you around the forums in a while Simon...

Or have I just gone blind?